Background ESGO (European Society of Gynaecological Oncology) and partners are continually improving the developmental opportunities for gynaecological oncology fellows. The objectives of this survey were to evaluate the progress in the infrastructure of the training systems in Europe over the past decade. We also evaluated training and assessment techniques, the perceived relevance of ENYGO (European Network of Young Gynaecological Oncologists) initiatives, and unmet needs of trainees.
Methodology National representatives of ENYGO from 39 countries were contacted with an electronic survey. A graduation in well/moderately/loosely-structured training systems was performed. Descriptive statistical analysis and frequency tables, as well as two-sided Fisher’s exact test, were used.
Results National representatives from 33 countries answered our survey questionnaire, yielding a response rate of 85%. A national fellowship is offered in 22 countries (66.7%). A logbook to document progress during training is mandatory in 24 (72.7%) countries. A logbook of experience is only utilized in a minority of nations (18%) for assessment purposes. In 42.4% of countries, objective assessments are recognized. Trainees in most countries (22 (66.7%)) requested additional training in advanced laparoscopic surgery. 13 (39.4%) countries have a loosely-structured training system, 11 (33.3%) a moderately-structured training system, and 9 (27.3%) a well-structured training system.
Conclusion Since the last publication in 2011, ENYGO was able to implement new activities, workshops, and online education to support training of gynaecological oncology fellows, which were all rated by the respondents as highly useful. This survey also reveals the limitations in establishing more accredited centers, centralized cancer care, and the lack of laparoscopic training.
- gynecologic surgical procedures
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Twitter @ilkerselcukmd, @agz_eriksson, @RasiahBharathan
Contributors ML, RB and KZ conceived the project plan. ML, RB and TN wrote the manuscript. TN and ML did the data analysis. Everyone of the co-authors collected data, revised and approved the final draft.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Patient consent for publication Not required.
Data availability statement All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information.
Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.